ML20009B402
| ML20009B402 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 07/07/1981 |
| From: | Adensam E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20009B403 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8107150374 | |
| Download: ML20009B402 (5) | |
Text
-
"*ES.
7 k/
9 V
Q 4,
4 s
s
_t Q
t\\
C M.
7 581 j e{ Vs h,h'/'
Docket No. 50-369 pb A
h APPLICN4T:
Duke Power Company V/
F', /
FACILITY:
ficGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2
~
SUBJECT:
Suff tARY OF JULY 6,1981 MEETING ON THE RESULTS OF VARIOUS TESTS OF ELECTRICAL PENETRATION C0lalECTORS HMlVFACTURED BY D. G. O'SRIEh On July 6,1981, the NRC staff met with representatives from Duke Power Company, D. G. O'Brien. Inc., and Life Cycle Engineering, a Duke Power consultant, to discuss the various environniental qualification testing that had been conducted on electrical penetration connectors manufactured by D. G. O'Brien. A list of attendees is attached (Attachment 1). These discussions centered around three specific series of tests referred to during the meeting as:
- 1) the McGuire tests - This was testing conducted for Duke Power by O'Brien on McGuire type connectors around 1974-1975 to the profile shown in Attachment. 2 as "ricGuire".
- 2) the O'Brien tests - Thew were tests conducted by O'Brien for the V.C. Sumer plant about 1978 to the profile shown in as "Sumer". Two designs for these connectors were tested.
- 3) The Sandia tests - These were tests conducted in June 1981 oy Sandia National Laboratories (SHL) for the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research to verify the licGuire tests [1) above].
The different test conditions, both aging and tine-teaperature profiles, were discussed at length and centered on the performance of an RTV silicone gromet used in the penetration and its behavior under high temperature and torqued conditions.
Failures in both the O'Brien and SNL tests seem to have resulted from this naterial extruding onto the wires and creating a weak point or bare wires in the cable conductors permitting a short to develop. Duke et al believe the failures were a result of the aging procedures used Tn' Bie O'Brien test on their initial design and in the Stil tests.
The following information on the test conoitions was provided:
The original McG' aire tests were repeated on the same module three times but :so aging was performed on tne grocu.t. There were no failure in these tests. The O'Bre tests on their initial design included aging on the assembly prior to the test. Failures similar to those at ShL did occur,
- " O
=
8107150374 810707 0500036]
cu:
- r)
DR ADOCK CATEk.................l...................l....................................
8:c ronksia tio eo uncu ano OFFICML_ RECORD _COPV a " "-32n2. l
ch
^
m w
g
(
g g
3 g
g 2
EOl.
? l'El but O'Brien did not extensively investigate those failures.
- Instead, they redesigned the connectors and retested the new design without aging.
liowever, a similar grommet in the receptacle part of the connector had been aged and used in the previous test. No failures were detected.
The ShL tests were conducted on the same connector as used in the ficGuire tests and the original O'Brien tests for Summer. These connectors were aged prior to testing and failures were observed.
Although the previous McGuire tests show the assembly is qualified for an accident environment, Duke Power plans to retest their connectors to include the effects of aging. Their consultant, Life Cycle Engineering stated that this silicone material usually ages by shrinking, not expanding.
O'Brien responded that they do plan to retest their new design used at Sumer when questioned.
Duke was requested to provide either the details of their proposed testing program in their July 15, 1981, environmental qualfication sub-mittal or to detail their plans for developing the testing progran including their schedule for the testing in that submittal. They were further requested to docucent in a letter their reasoning as to why McGuire could operate safely at 1007, power; to summarize the information on the various tests, the differences between the ShL tests and the !!cGuire tests, and what impact those differences have on interpreting the 1
different test results; to comit to include their test plans in the July 15, 1981 submittal; and to extend their justification for the qualific.stion of the tested connectors to all appropriate connectors in the plant. Duke agreed to provide such a letter by C00 July 6,1981 (At'Jachnent 3).
Elinor G. Adensam Acting Branch Chief Licensing Branch #4 Division of Licensing cc: See next page DI S T RI B tlT I ON Docket File Rff a tt son LB#4 Rdg R!la r t f i el d, t'P A DEisenhut OELD EAdensam GIE (3)
KJabbour h t. c :
TERA /NSIC/ TIC MDuncan Local PDR Silanauer NRC/PDR' RTedesco ACRS (10) ~
RVollmer TMurley
~"O. D.L.; LB f,4g[,,Di(k h
.,EQB., g g,
,,D,L
,[L,,
\\
abE(depsam ZRosztocz.)
RT sco cou... )
KJabhour:
,,,, 7777a1-- - 77q 7si-7777sT -- --77iysy-
............t........
n:c ronu aia no neisac" 2'
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
>usom = - m m ;
v,;.
UNITED STATES
,og NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
E WASHINGTON,.C.20656
'k g j
- s. y f JUL 7 1981 k
Docket No.- 50-369 /370 APPLICANT:
Duke Power Company s..,
FACILITY:
McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and.2'
SUBJECT:
.$UMMARY OF JULY 6,1981 MIN ING ON THE RE ULTS OF VARIOUS TESTS OF ELECTRICAL P.ENETRATION CONNECTORS MANUFACTURED BY D. G. O'5RIEN g,
On July 6,1981, the NRC staff met t h representatives from Duke Power Company, D. G. O'Brien, Inc., and Life Cycle Engineering, a Duke Power consultant, to discuss the yarious environmenta) qualification testing that had been conducted on electrical penetration connectors manufactured.by D. G. O' Bri en. A list of attendees is ittachea (Attachment 1). These discussions centered around three specific series of tests referred to during the meeting as:
- 1) tne McGuire tests - This was testing conducted for Duke Power by O'Brien on McGuire type connectoi s around 1974-1975 to the profile shown in Attachment 2 as "McGuire".
.:t
- 2) the O'Brien tests - These were tests conduct'ed by O'Brien for the V.C. SumT.er plant about 1978 to the profile shown in A*;tachment 2 as " Summer". Two designs for these connectors were tested.
- 3) The Sandia tests - These were tests conducted in June 1951 by Sandia I:ational Laboratories (SNL) fer the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research to verify the McGuire tests [1) above3 The different test conditions, both aging a "1 time-temperature profiles, were discuned at length and centered on the performance of an RTV silicone grommet used in the penetration and its behavior under high temperature and torqued conditions.
Failures in both the O'Brien and SNL tests seem to have resulted from this material extruding onto the wires and creating a weak point or bare wires in the ceble conductors permitting a short to develop. Duke et al believe the failures were a result of the aging procedures us,ed Tnle O'Brien test on their initial design and in the SNL tests.
The following information on the test concitions was provided:
The original McGdre tests were repeated on the same module three times i
but no aging was performed on the gromniet.' There were no failurerin thes ttsts. The O'Brien tests on their initial design included aging on the assembly prior to the test.
Failures similar to those at SNL did occur, 1
r
~
-2_
but O'Brien did not extensively investigate those failures.
- Instead, they redesigned the connectors and retested the new design without aging.
, However, a similar grommet in the receptacle part of the connector had been aged ano used in the previous test. No failures were detected.
The SNL tests were. conducted on the same connector as used in the McGuire tests and the original O'Brien tests fo'r Summer. These connectors were aged prior to testing and failures were observed.
Although the previous McGuire tests show the assembly is qualified for an accident environment, Duke Power plans to retest their connectors to include the effects of aging. Their consultant. Life Cycle Engineering stated that this silicone material usually ages by shrinking, not expanding.
O'Brien responded that they do. plan to retest their new design used at Surmer, when questioned.
Duke was requested to provide either the detail.s of their proposed testing program in their July 15, 1981, environmental qualfication sub-mittal or to-detail their plans for developing the testing program including their schedule for the testing in that submittal. They were further requested to document in a letter their reasoning as to why McGuire could opera'te safely at 100% power; to summarize the information on the various tests, the differences between the SNL tests and the McGuire tests, and what impact those differences have on interpreting the different test results; to commit to include their test plans in the July 15,1981 submittal and to extend their.jusjd fi, cation for the qualification of the tested connectors to all appropriate connectors in the plant. Duke agreed to provide such a letter by COB July 6,1961 ( Attachment 3).
i
~
Elinor G. Acensam, Acting Branch Chief Licensing Branch s4 Division of Licensing c::
See next page 1
I l
l G
G e
JUL 7 1981 McGuire S
?
Mr. William 0. Parker, J r.
N Vice President - Steam Production Duke Power Company P.O. Box 2178 422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 23242
. chelley Blum,isq.
cc:
Mr. W. L. Porter Duke Power Cbcpany T5402 Vickers Avenue Durham, North Carolina 27707 P.O. Box 2178 422 South Church Street g,
Charlotte, North Carolina 28242,-
Mr. R. S. Howard Power Systems Division Westinghouse Electric Corp..,.
P.O.-Box 355 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 1530 Mr. E. J. Keith EDS Nuclear Incorporated 220 Montgomery Street San Francisco, California 94104 Mr. J. E. Houghtaling
?
NUS' Corporation 2536. Countryside Boulevard Clearwater, Florida 33515 Mr. Jesse L. Riley, President The Carolina Environmental Study Group 854 Henley Place Charlotte., North Carolina 28207 J. Michael McGarry, III, Esq.
DeBevoise & Liberman 1200 Seventeenth Street, N.W.
Washington, D. C.
20036 Ms. M. J. Graham i
Resident Inspector McGuire NPS i
c/o U.S. Nuclear Regualtory Conraission f
P.O. Boi 216 Cornelius, North Carolina 28031 I
?
V
i ATTACHMENT 1 MEETING WITH DUKE POWER July 6, 1981 ATTENDEES NAME AFFILIATION E. G. Adensam NRC/DL P. M. McB ri de Duke Power - Design W. J. Fol ey, J r.
Duke Power - Desigr.
R. J. Flaherty Life Cycle Engineering, Consultant H. P. Hilberg D. G. O'Brien, Inc.
~
M. M. Slosson NRC/DE/EQB N. B. Le NRC/DE/.EQB W. S. Farmer NRC/RES/EEB D. F. Sullivan NRC/RES/EEB G. W. Reinmuth NRC/IE/VSPB D. G. Eisenhut NRC R. L. Tedesco NRR/L Z. R..Rosztoczy NRR/EQB W. R. Rutherford IE G. A. Copp Duke Power C. J. Wyl i e Duke #ower P. A. D1Benedetto NRR/EQB '
E. Case
- NRR *Part time J. Scinto OELD J. M. McGarry Debevoise & Liberman l
l 4
4
+
D er w
.-g-,
n
w a<
v
~
oW l
O W
g 9
5 a
e c
+
a I
- 3 CO n-0 a
o 0
5 'S N
1
- m
-a 3
-I tu
&- m
- d
[
, Ri I
u.
c-1 o
1
~
5 e
C.
I l
cri;
[5 lm e
1
.ca i
~
C a
c L
t:
n.
m E
~
r E
=
=
I ll W
. =.
-E l
H 2
e t
I i
1 l
9; 5,
)
/s t9. dt
/
e u
/
o'
/
.Ei ?s,-
C:
Oe.
N n
.='
E!
l m'
-s#" ' a,
N
~
l, C:. Cix E.
e o,
mi e-e E
p
\\
e*
]
I l
l l
c m
o; c'{
8j k
N El
- i..:
l g
m d; ibihthiadtue.L',
, -.,